Publications (2)5.36 Total impact
Article: Predicting therapy response in live tumor cells isolated with the flexible micro spring array device.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Cells disseminated from primary epithelial tumors into peripheral blood, called circulating tumor cells (CTCs), can be monitored to assess metastases and to provide a surrogate marker of treatment response. Here, we demonstrate how the flexible micro spring array (FMSA) device-a novel microfluidic device that enriches CTCs by two physical parameters: size and deformability-could be used in the rational development of treatment intervention and as a method to study the fundamental biology of CTCs. Cancer cells of different origins were spiked into healthy samples of donor blood to mimic blood samples of metastatic cancer patients. This spiked human blood was filtered using the FMSA device, and the recovered cells were successfully expanded in vitro and in a novel in vivo system. A series of experiments were performed to characterize these cells and to investigate the effect of chemotherapy on the resulting cultures. As few as 20 colon cancer cells in 7.5 mL blood could be isolated with the FMSA device, expanded both in vitro and in vivo and used at 25 cells per well to obtain significant and reliable chemosensitivity data. We also show that isolating a low number of viable patient CTCs and maintaining them in culture for a few weeks is possible. The isolation of viable cancer cells from human blood using the FMSA device provides a novel and realistic means for studying the biology of viable CTCs and for testing drug efficacy on these rare cells-a hypothesis that can be tested in future clinical trials.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) 06/2013; 12(13). · 5.36 Impact Factor
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Little is known about the degree of pain experienced by patients undergoing a bone marrow aspiration and biopsy (BMAB). To evaluate the effectiveness of several strategies aimed at reducing the pain score. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 258 consecutive adult patients who underwent BMAB via 6 different approaches, the first 5 of which were performed by one physician. Group A received local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine hydrochloride (5 mL) and a 5-minute wait time before the procedure; group B received local anesthesia with a double dose (10 mL) of lidocaine; group C received 5 mL of local anesthesia with a 10-minute wait; group D received 5 mL of local anesthesia plus a topical spray with ethyl chloride; group E received oral analgesia and anxiolysis 30 minutes before the procedure in addition to the group A dosage of lidocaine; and group F received the same anesthesia as did group A, but the BMAD was performed by a less experienced practitioner. On a 0 to 10 scale, the mean pain level among the 258 patients was 3.2 (standard deviation = 2.6). Rate of complications was low (<1%). Several strategies failed to improve the pain level, including the administration of a double dose of local anesthesia, waiting longer for the anesthesia effect, and the additional use of a topical anesthetic spray or oral analgesia and anxiolysis. Pain levels were not increased when the procedure was done by a less experienced practitioner. Younger age and female gender were associated with higher pain levels. Given that the average level of perceived pain during BMAB is low to moderate (approximately 3 on a 0-10 scale), the routine use of conscious sedation for this procedure may not be indicated. Several strategies aimed at reducing the pain level, including doubling the dose of anesthesia and using an oral prophylactic regimen of analgesia and anxiolysis, failed to improve pain scores.The journal of supportive oncology 05/2012; 10(4):166-70.